2 


sis 
7 


E GREAT COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND. - 


UNDER - 


* 


BY SAMUEL F. HAVEN, A.M. 


*! 








7 J FIT Hite 43. SV bg 
toy LOL /t Aho :. A 
ae 4 Se ed 


ign = LF Ze 


i eas thee 


Bee Me ee 
toon. Od aaa 


7 Ase. Fen. LE 


Lt 
iLs O. fous fo La 











pe? | 
; & . eee 
HISTORY OF GRANTS © 


UNDER THE 


GREAT COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND: 


A LECTURE 


OF A 


COURSE BY MEMBERS OF THE MASSACHUSETTS 
HISTORICAL SOCIETY, 


Pelibered before the Lowell Enstitute, 
Jan. 15, 1869. 


BY 


SAMUEL F. HAVEN, A.M. 


BOSTON: 
PRESS OF JOHN WILSON AND SON. 
1869. 





- } * 
f wv ‘a7 
s 
1 
' 
' 
’ 
: ; 
° - 
, 
’ 
7 he 
‘ 
: 2 
= . ' 
— f % ri 





HISTORY OF GRANTS 


UNDER 


THE GREAT COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND. 


| ee subject assigned to me for a lecture to-night is, “ History 
- of Grants under the Great Council for New England.” 

However important this may be in a historical point of view, 
so far as pleasurable interest is concerned it certainly has a rather 
dry and unpromising aspect. 

Moreover, it was said of this Great Council for New England, 
by the learned Dr. Belknap, after he had tried in vain to harmo- 
nize their proceedings, that — 


“Hither from the jarring interests of the members, or their indistinct 
knowledge of the country, or their inattention to business, or some other 
cause which does not fully appear, their affairs were transacted in a con- 
fused manner from the beginning; and the grants which they made were 
so inaccurately described, and interfered so much with each other, as to 
occasion difficulties and controversies, some of which are not yet ended.” 


So, too, Governor Sullivan in his work on “ Land Titles in 
Massachusetts” declares that the legislative acts of the Council 
for New England and their judicial determinations “were but a 
chain of blunders;” and “ their grants, from the want of an ac- 
curate knowledge of the geography of the territory, were but a 
course of confusion.” 

Possibly, it was with the hope of obtaining additional light 
upon these obscurities and perplexities, to the extent of recon- 
ciling apparent discrepancies, that the subject was selected for 
treatment in this series of historical lectures. But intricacies 
which learned historians and acute lawyers have failed to eluci- 
date, it may be presumed are not susceptible of a distinct and 


4 HISTORY OF GRANTS UNDER THE 


definite solution, such as Courts require for the establishment of 
a title to property ; and we may be compelled to find in a nar- 
rative of the circumstances under which they had their origin ~ 
their only reasonable explanation. 

You will therefore be spared a technical dissertation upon 
charters, patents, grants, and other methods of conveying terri- 
torial rights, and be asked to listen to a relation of the rise, the 
character, the operations, and the end of the great corpora- 
tion in England created by James I. on the 3d of November, 
1620, consisting of forty noblemen, knights, and gentlemen, and 
called “'The Council established at Plymouth, in the County of 
Devon, for the Planting, Ruling, and Governing of New England 
in America.” 

It will be necessary to go back a little; not indeed to the days 
of Adam and Eve, as did our distinguished New England chro- 
nologer, Dr. Prince, who devoted so much time and space to the 
preliminary annals of the world, that he died before completing 
those of this limited portion of the globe, which were the real 
object of his work, — but to the beginning of England’s conven- 
tional title to American possessions. It was a conventional title, 
inasmuch as it rested upon an understanding among the so-called 
Christian powers, that the rights of nations and peoples, who were 
not at least nominally Christian, should be entirely disregarded. 
The sovereigns of Europe carried out in practice the principle 
which the Puritans of Cromwell’s parliament were said to have 
asserted in theory, and apparently regarded the scripture promise _ 
that the saints shall inherit the earth as a mere statement of their 
own just prerogative. Among Catholics, the Pope, as an inspired 
administrator, distributed newly discovered regions according to 
his inclination and infallible discretion. His assignments of con- 
tinents and seas by the boundaries of latitude and longitude 
were valid in Spain and Portugal and France; but in England 
the King, when he had become also the head of a church, claimed 
authority to empower his subjects to discover “ remote, heathen, 
and barbarous lands, not actually possessed of any Christian 
prince or people, and the same to hold, occupy, and enjoy, with 
all commodities, jurisdictions, and royalties, both by sea and 
land ;” of course, in subordination to his own paramount author- 
ity, but with no reference to the supremacy of the Roman pontiff. 





GREAT COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND. ~ 3) 


John and Sebastian Cabot were commissioned, in like phra- 
seology, by Henry VII., “to seek out countries or provinces of 
the heathen and infidels, wherever situated, hitherto unknown 
to all Christians, and to subdue and possess them as his sub- 
jects.” If their discoveries had been followed at once by pos- 
session, the papal sanction might have been deemed essential to 
a sound title; but England had long been a Protestant country 
before steps were taken to maintain her claims to a portion of 
the New World. Remote events, like distant objects, are apt to 
seem crowded together, for want of a perspective to make the 
intervals which separate them evident to our perceptions. Thus 
we often fail to realize the duration of uneventful periods of 
history which come between the strifes and commotions, or 
other great occurrences which chiefly occupy the attention of 
both the historian and his reader. From a.p. 1495, the date 
of the commission to the Cabots, to A.D. 1578, the date of the 
letters patent to Sir Humphrey Gilbert, under which possession 
was first taken for the English crown, the lapse of time exceeds 
that of two generations of men, as these are usually estimated. 

Meanwhile, circumstances were silently and indirectly, as well 
as slowly, preparing for the settlement of this portion of the 
American continent. Unrecorded voyages were annually made 
to our coasts for fish by the Spaniards, Portuguese, and French; 
the fasts of the church causing a large demand for that article 
of food in Catholic countries. The people bordering on the Bay 
of Biscay were hereditary fishermen. Their ancestors had cap- 
tured whales in their own tempestuous sea; and Biscayans, or 
Basques, as they were more frequently termed, were in great re- 
quest as experts for the fisheries at Newfoundland, and along the 
shores of New England. They professed to believe that their 
countrymen visited the same fishing-grounds before Columbus 
crossed the ocean. ‘The business was so lucrative that the re- 
ports first brought home by the Cabots of the great abundance 
of codfish in those regions produced an excitement among the 
people engaged in that trade, not unlike that which rumors of 
gold in California and Australia have created in more recent 

times. ; 
__ No account has been preserved of the commencement of fishing 
voyages to the American seas; but they can be traced back to 


6 ' HISTORY OF GRANTS UNDER THE 


within half a dozen years of the return of the Cabots; and 
twelve or fifteen years later as many as fifty vessels of different 
nations were employed on the Grand Banks. 

Of such voyages no journal was kept and no history was writ- 
ten; because it was the policy of the adventurers to keep these 


prolific sources of wealth, as much as possible, from attracting - 


the attention of competitors. 
The presence of European vessels on our shores, in consider- 


able numbers, a century before the arrival of the Pilgrims, may ~ 
account for traditions among the natives, and the occasional dis- ~ 


covery of articles of European manufacture in their graves, that 
have been supposed to point to the visits of the Northmen at 
far more distant periods.! 

A process of preparation not less marked and effective was at 
the same time going on in England itself. Until the reign of 


Henry VIL, that kingdom had been behind all other European 


States in mercantile enterprise.- Italy, Spain, Portugal, Holland, 
and even Germany, were before her in commerce or manufac- 
tures. The fluctuations of trade, in the removal of its seats from 
one place or country to another, are among the marvels and curi- 


osities of history. The chief wonders of the world —the costly 


and gigantic remains of decayed cities, where now all is silence 


and desolation—are the fruits of accumulated capital in what — 


were once the forwarding and distributing stations of trade. 
Thebes, Babylon, Nineveh, Palmyra, Tyre, and Carthage were 
great and magnificent, because, as the prophet Nahum saith of 
Nineveh, “ They multiplied their merchants above the stars of 
heaven.” 

Wherever traffic has found a seat and centre, art, architecture, 
enterprise, and political power have been its inevitable fruits. ‘The 


growth and decay of these local influences, and their distribution — 
in turn among the kingdoms of the earth, though springing from ~ 


natural causes, pelouse no less to the mysterious operations of 
Providence. It was the.commercial decline of Italy (the “indus- 


trial Italy of the Middle Ages), whose prodigal remains of — 


zesthetic splendor are the memorials of her merchant princes, that 


1 When Captain John Smith visited the Susquehanna Indians, in 1608, they had 
utensils of iron and brass, which, by their own account, originally came from the 
French of Canada. 





) 

















GREAT COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND. Yi 


carried Venetian navigators to England, among them the family 
of Cabots, seeking employment for the exercise of their native 
arts. At the same time, the incessant wars upon the continent 
were driving tradesmen and manufacturers from the free cities 
of central Europe, which they had built up and enriched ; many 
of whom took refuge in the British Isles, which thus easily 
acquired the advantages of skill and experience in the production 
and sale of important fabrics. England’s opportunity had come. 
Though not lying in the course of the world’s great thorough- 


_ fares, yet, by insular position, favorably formed for maritime 


pursuits, her chances of wealth and power from the magic 


_agencies of commerce had at length arrived. Through the 


reigns of Henry VII, Henry VIII., Edward VI., and the bloody 
Mary, to their full fruition in the Augustan era of Queen Eliza- 


_ beth, these causes were not only increasing the riches, but. 


developing wonderfully the mental and physical character and 
capacities of the British people. More independent, politically 
and socially, than their neighbors in Holland, they shared with 
them the accumulation of the precious metals which flowed 
from American mines, through Spain and Portugal, to the chief 
marts of trade, and experienced the stimulating effects of capital 
in all departments of life and action. Enterprise, extravagance, 
ambition, emulation, greed, were the healthy and unhealthy 
consequences of a prosperous and excited community. 

The tendency to a sort of theatrical exaggeration in sentiment 
and manners that followed upon this development of physical 
resources and mental energies was perhaps a natural result. 
Man has often been declared to be the product of the pecu- 
liarities of the period in which he was born. Well might 
Shakespeare say of his own time, “ All the world is a stage, and 
all the men and women are mere players;” for the whole reign 


‘of Elizabeth was a theatrical pageant, where Leicester and 


Hssex, Sidney, Southampton, and Raleigh, and not excepting 
Bacon, the representative of philosophy, personated the various 
characters of an heroic drama; while the many-sided Shake- 


1 The superior naval advancement of Italy at that period is illustrated by the 


fact, that the leaders of discovery in the western hemisphere — Columbus in the 


service of Spain, Cabot in the service of England, Vespucius in the service of Portu- 
gal, and Verrazano in the service of France — were Italians. 


S 3 HISTORY OF GRANTS UNDER THE 


speare was himself a dramatic embodiment of the entire intel- 
lectual expansion of his age. 

There lived then a certain remarkable woman, — remarkable 
for having two sons of different fathers, whose heroic tempera- 
ment and versatile talents must have been derived from their 
common mother. The half-brothers, Humphrey Gilbert and 
Walter Raleigh, were more alike in tastes and genius than is 
often seen in a nearer relationship. It was the blood of the 
Champernons,—a name that has a place of its own in our 
colonial history,— and not that of the Gilberts or Raleighs, 
which made them what they were. 

To these two men, of honorable birth and social standing, 
each of whom combined the habits and qualities of a soldier 
with those of a studious scholar, and could handle with equal 
skill the pen and the sword, we owe it that this New England 
where we live, and this entire Union of vigorous States, are not 
dependencies of France or Spain, or such as are those feeble 
provinces which sprang from French or Spanish colonization. 

Whatever constructive right or title England had acquired by 
the discoveries of the Cabots, a little more delay, and their 
assertion would have been no longer practicable, except at the 
point of the sword. It was Gilbert and Raleigh who, in the 
nick of time, gave this direction to British energies ; and appar- 
ently nothing but the grand ideas and exhaustless resolution of 
these great minds, and their inspiring influence amid disappoint- 
ment and disaster, saved an indefinite and uncertain claim by 
means of a positive and substantial possession. 

The rival claims of the leading European powers, at this 
juncture, to the soil of our continent north of the Gulf of Mexico, 
were not better defined, or more easy of satisfactory adjustment 


upon legal and equitable principles, than are those of the — 
grantees of the Great Council for New England, which are, 


now the particular subject of consideration. The rules and pre- 
cedents of national and international law furnish a convenient 
phraseology for the discussion of questions relating to territorial 


ownership and boundaries, as phrenology provides a convenient — 


nomenclature for describing the faculties of the mind although 
it may not be admitted to determine their actual position and 


limits. In larger divisions of land, even where private citizens 





: 
: 






GREAT COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND. ~ 9 


alone are concerned, the most tenacious grasp is apt ultimately 
to acquire the legal title. ‘Time heals defects, and the pertina- 
cious possessor finds his right to hold and convey secured by 
circumstances, and protected by judicial tribunals. 

The English jurists of the reign of Elizabeth maintained, that 
discovery and possession united could alone give a valid title to 
a new country. But how far asunder in point of time might 
these acts be, and yet retain their virtue when brought together? 
And what if another discovery and a possession came between 
them? Will a possession fairly taken, but not continued by 
unin‘errupted occupancy, avail for a completion of title? 

‘lie answers to these questions are not so distinctly given as 
to enable us to found upon them, clearly, the right of the British 
crown to issue patents and charters, empowering its subjects to 
hold and distribute the regions which, under the names of Vir- 
ginia and New England, embraced a large portion of the North 
American continent. 

John and Sebastian Cabot discovered, and to some extent 
explored, the American coast (4. D. 1497-8) from Labrador to 
the Carolinas, more than a year before the continent had been 
seen by Columbus or by Americus Vespucius; but the subjects 
of other powers had visited these shores familiarly, and some of 
them had taken formal possession in the name of their sovereign, 
long before Sir Humphrey Gilbert came to Newfoundland in 
1583. 

On behalf of the King of Portugal, Cortereal ranged the 
northern coast only two years later than the Cabots, and gave 
the name Labrador to the country still so called. 

A map of the Gulf of St. Lawrence and the neighboring 
country was made by the French, from their own observations, 
as early as 1507. 

It is said, that in 1522 there were fifty houses at Newfound- 
land occupied by people of different nations. There were prob- 
ably some English among them, although the English fisheries 
were then chiefly in the direction of Iceland. 

In 1524, an expedition for discovery was sent by Francis I. of 
France, under John De Verazzano, a Florentine, who explored 
our coast from the Carolinas to Newfoundland, as the Cabots 
had done, but with more particularity, and called the country 


ae: 


10 HISTORY OF GRANTS UNDER THE 


New France; and in the same year Stephen Gomez, in the 
service of Spain, sailed from Florida to Cape Race; his object 
being, as was then the case with almost all the navigators that 
preceded him here, to find a passage through to the Pacific 
Ocean, then called the South Sea. 

After this, while the Spaniards were seeking a footitald in 
Florida, the French, in a series of expeditions from 1534 to 
1542, with Cartier as chief leader, were, on behalf of France, 
erecting monuments in token of possession, and planting colo- 
nies, in the region of the gulf of St. Lawrence. Having endured 
several seasons of trial and suffering, these colonies came to an 
end, as settlements ; leaving, it is claimed, some of their members 
still in the country. With the exception of a disastrous ex- 
pedition in 1549, when Roberval and a numerous train of 
adventurers were supposed to have perished at sea, no farther 
measures were taken by the French to re-establish themselves in 
the North till near the close of that century. 

Thus, while England had neglected to maintain her rights as 
a discoverer, Spain, Portugal, and France had explored the 
same parts of North America; and France had planted her 
subjects on the soil, without formal remonstrance, so far as is 
known, from any other power. The English fishery at Newfound- 
land had become important in 1548; but no record has been 
preserved of any attempt at colonization. 

This negligence, or indifference, was first broken by Sir 
Humphrey Gilbert. He had written a discourse to show the 
probability of a passage by the north-west to India, which may 
have promoted the voyage of Frobisher to the Arctic Sea in 
1576; and, in 1578, he received from Queen Elizabeth authority 
to discover and take possession of remote and barbarous lands 
unoccupied by any Christian prince or people, as the Cabots had 
been empowered to do by Henry VII. It is noticeable, that the 
patent to Gilbert contains no allusion to the Cabots, or to any 
rights of the crown derived from former discoveries. For aught 
that appears in the instrument itself, this was an independent 
and original enterprise for discovery and conquest, with a right 
on the part of Gilbert to possess and govern the discovered and 
conquered lands in subordination to the Queen. But such was 
not the view of the grantee himself. He did not survive to be 





—— 2 


GREAT COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND. 11 


his own historian; but we learn from the narrative of Edward 
Haies, “a principall actour in the same voyage,” — 

1st, That the enterprise of Gilbert was based upon the con- 
sideration, that “John Cabot, the father, and Sebastian, his son, 
an Englishman born, were the first finders out of all that great 
tract of land stretching from the Cape of Florida unto those 
Islands which we now call the Newfoundland; all of which 
they brought and annexed unto the crown of England.” 

2d, That if a man’s motives “ be derived from a virtuous and 
heroical mind, preferring chiefly the honor of God, compassion 
of poor infidels captived by the devil, tyrannizing in most 
wonderful and dreadful manner over their bodies and souls,” and 
other honorable purposes specified, “ God will assist such an 
actor beyond the expectation of man.” Especially as, “in this 
last age of the world, the time is complete for receiving also 
these Gentiles into his mercy; . . . it seeming probable by the 
event of precedent attempts made by the Spaniards and French 
sundry times, that the country lying North of Florida God hath 
reserved to be reduced unto Christian civilization by the English 
nation.” 


. “Then seeing the English nation only hath right unto these countries 
of America, from the Cape of Florida northward, by the privilege of 
first discovery, . . . which right also seemeth strongly defended on our 
behalf by the powerful hand of almighty God, withstanding the enter- 
prises of other nations; it may greatly encourage us upon so just 
ground, as is our right, and upon so sacred an intent as to plant religion, 
to prosecute effectually the full possession of these so ample and pleasant 
countries appertaining unto the crown of England; the same (as is to be 
conjectured by infallible arguments of the world’s end approaching) being 
now arrived unto the time by God prescribed of their vocation, if ever 
their calling unto the knowledge of God may be expected.” 


This conviction, that the end of the world was near, was the 
source of much of the heroic adventure, and the excuse for 
much of the merciless barbarity towards the natives, which 
attended the occupation of this continent by Europeans. The 
Word was first to be preached among all nations; and soldiers 
and priests alike believed themselves agents of heaven in the 
fulfilment of prophecy, when, acting under papal or royal au- 
thority, they compelled the submission of heathen nations to the 


ae 


12 HISTORY OF GRANTS UNDER THE 


Christian faith by violence and bloodshed. Columbus thought 
he had ascertained by calculation, that there remained but one 


hundred and fifty years from his time before the final catastrophe. - 
“ My enterprise,” said he, “has accomplished simply that which 


the prophet Isaiah had predicted, — that, before the end of the 
world, the gospel should be preached upon all the earth, and the 
Holy City be restored to the church.” Nearly ninety years of 
that remnant of time had expired, when, influenced by similar 
sentiments, Sir Humphrey Gilbert set forth on a similar errand. 

It was his intention to take possession at Newfoundland for 
the northern portion of the country, and at some point nearer 


Florida for the southern portion of the English claim; going 


first to Newfoundland to gain the advantage of a favorable 
season of the year, and the period when fishing vessels were 
most numerous at that station. The ships of different nations 
then engaged in that employment, were one hundred from Spain, 
fifty from Portugal, and one hundred and fifty from France, to 
fifty from England. But England had become full-blooded and 
dangerous, and already aspired to rule the seas. She had the 


best ships, which, as Haies expresses it, were “admirals” over — 


the rest, and controlled the harbors. 

Gilbert landed, and calling together the merchants and ship- 
masters of the several nations, took possession with all the 
prescribed formalities. He promulgated laws, to which the 
people, by general voice, promised obedience ; and made grants 
of land, the recipients covenanting to pay an annual rent, and 
yearly to maintain possession of the same by themselves or their 
assigns as his representatives. 

We know that Gilbert was lost at sea, without having been 
able to make a like demonstration elsewhere. But his proceed- 
ings at Newfoundland have been regarded by all English writers 
as substantiating the English title to the whole country. No 
distinct colony was left behind him; but the British domination 
continued to be recognized by the mixed population on the 
shore, and was, when necessary, enforced by summary process 
among the ships. 

On learning the death of his heroic half-brother, Sir Walter 
Raleigh, his partner in the enterprise, immediately obtained a 
similar commission and patent in his own name, and sought to 





Ee eee ee a 





GREAT COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND. 13 


complete their purpose by planting a colony at the South. It 
was his fortune, too, to fail in that part of his design which con- 
templated the establishment of settlements under his own rule 
and tributary to himself; but he was the first to possess and 
occupy the soil of Virginia; and, although interrupted for a 
time, the occupancy of British subjects in that region became 
permanent, without the interference of rival attempts at coloniza- 
tion. ’ 

It was under such circumstances, and in such manner, that 
the title of England, be it good or bad, to a portion of our con- 
tinent, was originally acquired and maintained. 

Tt seemed to be desirable to refer to the nature of that title, 
to the civil condition of England, to the operations of trade and 
fishery, and to the colonial projects which preceded the incor- 
poration of that semi-commercial, semi-political body known as 
the Great Council for New England. For it was the wealth of 
the mercantile classes, resulting in some degree from the dis- 
covery of new sources and new courses of trade in distant 
regions, that made the nobility and gentry eager to partake of 
their gains. The “ Fellowship of English Merchants for the 
Discovery of New Trades,” sometimes called also the Muscovy 
or Russian Company, which had a charter as early as 1554-5, 
had been remarkably successful. Immense fortunes, like those 
of Sir Thomas Smith and Sir John Wolstenholm, and others 
who took part in the Virginia enterprises, had been realized by 
merchants who became knights and baronets. The wealth of 
the House of Commons far exceeded that of the House of Lords. 
The great increase of extravagance in private expenditure had 
become a serious drain upon the resources of the nobility; and 
it was the hope of profit from the fur trade and fisheries, com- 
bined with the advantage and dignity of territorial proprietor- ° 
ship, that caused the formation and governed the conduct of the 
New-England Company, while ignorance of business and em- 
barrassments arising from conflicting claims, domestic and for- 
eign, brought it to an end. 

There is another preliminary fact, which is of great interest 
to New England, and especially to Massachusetts. At the 
beginning of a new century, A.D. 1602, Raleigh’s colonies had 
disappeared, and all traces of them were lost. Dr. Holmes, in 


14 HISTORY OF GRANTS UNDER THE 





his Annals, remarks, that then “in North America north of 
Mexico not a single European family could be found.” If we 
understand by family a household of men, women, and children, 
this statement may be nearly correct; and yet it is estimated 
that there were at that time, at Newfoundland, as many as ten 
thousand men and boys employed on board and on shore in the 
business of taking and curing fish. Colonization, however, had 
been virtually abandoned in despair. At that critical period, it 
was revived by two men whose service to this country in that 
respect has never been properly or sufficiently acknowledged. 
These were the Earl of Southampton and Bartholomew Gos- 
nold: the first, the friend and patron of Shakespeare, and the 
subject of many of his sonnets, who had impaired his fortune by 
his liberality to men of letters; the other, an intrepid mariner 
from the west of England, who becaine the leading spirit, and 
one of the first victims, of the attempt to renew the settlements 
of Virginia. 

You are all familiar with the story of Gosnold’s visit to 
Massachusetts Bay, in 1602; and it hardly needs to be stated, 
that the expedition was undertaken with the consent of Raleigh, 
as coming within his jurisdiction; that the cost was chiefly 
defrayed by the Earl of Southampton; that the design of the 
voyage was to find a direct and shorter way across the ocean 
and a proper seat for a plantation; that the company consisted 
of thirty-two men, twenty of whom were to remain in the 
country ; that, in fact, they were the first to take a straight course 
across the Atlantic, instead of the usual passage to Virginia by 
the West Indies; that they reached land near Salem Harbor; 
that from them came the familiar names of Cape Cod, Martha’s 
Vineyard, the Elizabeth Islands, &c.; and that they built a fort 
at Cuttyhunk in Buzzard’s Bay. They were delighted with the 
country, but were compelled to return home for larger supplies. 
Before they could come back better provided for a permanent 
settlement, Queen Elizabeth died, Raleigh was thrown into 
prison by her successor, and all schemes for American coloniza- 
tion were of necessity to be abandoned, or organized upon a new 
basis under a new sovereign himself destitute of energy and 
enterprise. Fortunately, Gosnold and his companions were not 
merely men of action, but could write and speak as well; and to 


GREAT COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND. 15 


their glowing narratives and zealous exertions, aided by the 
famous Hakluyt, and men of influence at Court, historians 
ascribe the procurement of the charter of 1606, from which the 
ultimate settlement of the United States and the resulting 
heritage of territorial rights are to be dated. 

The fact of Gosnold’s selection of our own coast for an 
intended colony is sufficiently well known; but I am sure, that 
the characters and services of the leaders of that little company 
are not sufficiently understood and appreciated, or, instead 
of the farce which was enacted over the later and inconse- 
quential landing and brief continuance of a body of outlaws on 
the coast of Maine, all New England would have united in meas- 
ures to honor the memory of the real founders of permanent 
habitation and indisputable title within our national bounds. 

For some reason, the charter of 1606 did not embrace the 
whole of the British claim. It extended no farther south than 
the present limits of North Carolina, and no farther north than 
the present limits of the State of Vermont; that is, from the 
thirty-fourth to the forty-fifth degree of latitude. Within these 
bounds there were to be two colonies under separate administra-, 
tions, subject to a paramount administration in the mother 
country. ‘The southern colony could plant anywhere between 
the thirty-fourth and forty-first degrees, and the northern colony, 
anywhere between the thirty-eighth and forty-fifth degrees; 
leaving three degrees, or the space from the southern point of 
Maryland to the southern point of Connecticut, as common 
ground. 

The northern company had need of hot haste in choosing a 
location; as, in the race for possession, the French had once 
more taken the lead, and renewed their plans of founding an 
American empire. Having before sent over a ship-load of felons 
from the jails, who were left to take care of themselves at the 
Isle of Sables, a more formidable expedition was organized in 
1603, the year succeeding Gosnold’s memorable voyage. Henry 
the Great being then King of France, a gentleman of his house- 
hold, named De Monts, received from him a patent of the Ameri- 
can territory from the fortieth to the forty-sixth degree of north 
latitude, with power, as lieutenant-general, to colonize and rule 
it. It will be noticed that this grant almost exactly covers the 


16 ¢ HISTORY OF GRANTS UNDER THE 


territory assigned to the northern colony of Virginia by the Eng- 
lish charter of 1606. De Monts lost no time in entering upon 


his dominion; and he and his followers settled themiselves in 


Nova Scotia, at Monts désert (now called Mount Desert), and 
along the coast of Maine as far as the Penobscot. They looked 
into Boston Harbor in search of a more genial climate, but 
were repelled by the hostile attitude of the natives. 

The company of outlaws which, in imitation of the French, 
Chief-Justice Popham sent to the mouth of the Sagadehoe or 
Kennebec River, in 1607, was undoubtedly intended and expected 
to check the advances of that nation. It not only failed, but its 
failure paralyzed the energies of the northern company of Vir- 
ginia for many succeeding years. 


That portion of the duplex contrivance of James I. accom-— 


plished nothing important of itself until, after much opposition, 
a separate organization and charter were obtained in 1620. In 
the mean time, its twin-brother, at Jamestown, flourished, after a 


fashion; it is doubtful whether most aided or hindered by the 


frequent interference of the English monarch, that “ Dominie 
Sampson” spoilt into a king, who believed himself to be the 
fountain of wisdom, not less than the fountain of honor. It was 
able, in 1613, to fit out an armed vessel, commanded by Captain 
Argall, which broke up the French settlements at Port Royal, 
Mount Desert, &c., and compelled their inhabitants to retire 
towards Canada; protesting all the while, that whatever abstract 
rights Great Britain might possess, if any there were, the Vir- 
ginia charter expressly excepted in its grants regions already 
occupied by any Christian prince or people; they (the French) 
being a Christian people, in occupation of the places from which 
they were driven two years before the Virginia charter was made; 
which was very true. 

Upon the island of Manhattan at the mouth of Hudson’s river, 
on the common ground of the two so-called Virginia companies, 
the Dutch had located themselves, claiming title from its discoy- 
ery by Hudson, in their service. While returning from his 
expedition against the French, Captain Argall called on them 
also, and required submission. They were too feeble to resist; 
but the next year a new governor came from Amsterdam, with 
reinforcements, asserting the right of Holland to the country, and 





GREAT COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND. TY. 


refusing the tribute which his predecessor had consented to pay 
to the English. 

It was to this inheritance, of not undisputed possessions, to 
which the new corporation, styled “ The Council established at 
Plymouth, in the County of Devon, for the Planting, Ruling, and 
Governing of New England in America,” succeeded on the 3d 
of November, 1620. 

The charter, after referring to the previous charter of 1606, 
and the changes that had since been made for the benefit of the 
southern company, states that Sir Ferdinando Gorges, and other 
principal adventurers of the northern company, with divers per- 
sons of quality who now intend to be their associates, resolving 
to prosecute their designs more effectually, and intending to estab- 
lish fishery, trade, and plantation, within the precincts of the said 
northern company ; for that purpose, and to avoid all confusion 
and difference between themselves and the other company, 
have desired to be made a distant body. 

It proceeds to grant to the persons named, the territory from 
the fortieth to the forty-eighth degree of north latitude and 
through the main land from sea to sea, to be called New Enc- 
LAND; that is, from the latitude of Philadephia to the middle of 
Newfoundland, and through all that width from the Atlantic to 
the Pacific; varying a few degrees of latitude from the bounds 
' prescribed in the original patent. 

They were to be one body politic and corporate, to consist of 
forty persons, and no more, with perpetual succession. Vacan- 
cies were to be filled by the members. They were empowered 
to establish laws not contrary to the laws of England; and to 
their “ governors, officers, and ministers,” according to the natural 
limits of their offices, was given authority to correct, punish, 
pardon, and rule all English subjects that should become colon- 
ists, according to the laws and instructions of the Council; and 
in defect thereof, in cases of necessity, according to their good 
discretions, in cases criminal and capital as well as civil, and 
both marine and others. Such proceedings to be, as near as 
conveniently may be, agreeable to the laws, statutes, government, 
and policy, of the realm of England. The continent, from the 
fortieth to the forty-eighth degree, from sea to sea, was absolutely 


given, granted, and confirmed to the said Council and their suc- 
2 





18 HISTORY OF GRANTS UNDER THE 


cessors, to be holden, as of the manor of Kast Greenwich, in free 
and common socage,! as distinguished from the feudal tenure 
of personal service; and all subjects were forbidden to trade or 
fish within their limits without a license from the Council under 
seal. : 

The rank and personal standing of the grantees corresponded 
to the extent of territory and the magnitude of the powers be- 
stowed upon them. ‘They consisted of many of the highest 
nobility of the kingdom, and knights and gentlemen of promi- 
nence and influence. Their aims and purposes were not less lofty 
and aristocratic. Upon the general ground, that kings did first 
lay the foundations of their monarchies, by reserving to them- 
selves the sovereign power (as fit it was), and dividing their king- 
doms into counties, baronies, hundreds, and the like, they say, — 


“This foundation being so certain, there is no reason for us to vary 
from it; and therefore we resolve to build our edifices upon it. So as 
we purpose to commit the management of our whole affairs there in 
general unto a governor, to be assisted by the advice and counsel of so 
many of the patentees as shall be there resident, together with the officers 
of State.” 


Among the “officers of State” were to be a treasurer, a 
marshal, an admiral, and a master of ordnance. ‘Two parts 
of the whole territory were to be divided among the patentees, 
and the other third reserved for public uses; but the entire 
territory was to be formed into counties, baronies, hundreds, 
and the like. From every county and barony deputies were 
to be chosen to consult upon the laws to be framed, and 
to reform any notable abuses. Yet these are not to be assembled 
but by order of the President and Council in England, “ who 
are to give life to the laws so to be made, as those to whom of 
right it best belongs.” The counties and baronies were to be 
governed by the chief, and the officers under him, with a power 
of high and low justice, subject to an appeal, in some cases, to 
the supreme courts. The lords of counties might also divide 
their counties into manors and lordships, with courts for deter- 
mining petty matters. When great cities had grown up, they 


1 “ An estate of the highest nature that a subject under any government can 
possibly receive and hold.” — Sullivan, Land Titles in Massachusetts, p. 36. 


a 


GREAT COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND. 19 


were to be made bodies politic to govern their own private 
affairs, with a right of representation by deputies or burgesses.1 

There was a provision in the charter for its renewal and 
amendment, if changes should be found expedient; and meas- 
ures were taken for a new patent, omitting the requirement that 
their government should be as near the laws of England as may 
be, and inserting authority to create titles of honor, and estab- 
lish feudal tenures. 

The chief managers of the affairs of the Council were Sir 
Ferdinando Gorges, a friend and fellow-soldier of Raleigh, who, 
ever since the failure of the Popham enterprise in Maine, had 
been striving to settle a plantation for trade and fishing there on 
his own account; Captain John Mason, who had been governor 
of Newfoundland; and the Earl of Warwick, the President. 
The patents issued to colonists, whether companies or single 
adventurers, were intended to conform to the political system 
they had adopted. 

The influence of Gorges is seen in the project, which was 
early started, of laying out a county, on the general behalf, forty 
miles square, on the Kennebec River, and building a great city at 
the junction of the rivers Kennebec and Androscoggin. ‘Two 
kinds of patents were provided for by the Council: one for 
private undertakers of petty plantations, who were to have a 
‘certain quantity of land allotted them at an annual rent, with 
conditions that they should not alienate without leave, and 
should settle a stated number of persons with cattle, &c., within 
a definite period; the other for such parties as proposed to build 
towns, with large numbers of people, having a government and 
magistrates, who were to have power to frame such laws and 
constitutions as the majority should think fit, subordinate to the 
State which was to be established, “ until other order should be 
taken.” 

The grand schemes of the Council were not destined to 
experience even the promise of success. They began to fail 
from the very beginning of their operations. ‘They had to con- 
tend not only against the active hostility of the Southern cor- 
poration, the remonstrances of the French, and the pertinacity 


1 Brief Relation of the President and Council. In Mass. Hist. Soc. Col., vol. xix, 





20 3 HISTORY OF GRANTS UNDER THE 


of the Hollanders, who said little, while they encroached upon 
the fisheries, and inclined to take possession of Connecticut 
River; but the fishermen and fur-traders of England itself, 
whose rights, become prescriptive by long enjoyment, were so 
summarily interfered with. The matter was taken up by Parlia- 
ment, and Sir Ferdinando Gorges was summoned to their bar. 
His argument, that the enlargement of the King’s dominions 
and the advancement of religion were of more consequence than 
a disorderly course of fishing, which, except for their plantation, 
would soon be given over, (as so goodly a coast could not long 
be left unpeopled by the French, Spanish, or Dutch), if it did not 
satisfy the Commons, had weight with the King, who continued 
his favor and protection. 

Gorges was to be the Governor of the new State; and, in 
1623, the attempt was made to transfer an operative govern- 
ment to the American soil. The King had issued a proclama- 
tion enforcing their authority ; and now Robert Gorges, son of 
Sir Ferdinando, was sent over as Lieutenant-General and 
Governor of New England, with a suite of officers, to establish 
his court at Massachusetts Bay; where a tract extending ten 
miles on the north-east side of the bay had been granted to him 
personally by patent. 

This proved an unfortunate procedure. It increased the 
hostile feeling in England, so that, in a list of public grievances 
brought forward by Parliament, the first was the patent for New 
England. This public declaration of the MHouse’s dislike, 
Gorges tells us, “shook off all adventurers from the plantation, 
and made many of the patentees quit their interest.” The Lieu- 
tenant-Governor and his military and ecclesiastical officers were 
advised to return home; and thus the plan of a State ruled by 
a Company, such as we have seen to succeed in India, failed in 
New England. 

The other purpose of the Council, viz., to derive a profit 
from the fisheries and the fur-trade, with a view also to the 
ultimate advantages of territorial proprietorship, was continued 
in a feeble and desultory way. The great object was to get the 
country occupied at all events, and grants of land were made 
with a singular disregard of boundaries and of previous convey- 
ance. Gorges and Mason were the only persons at all acquainted 





GREAT COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND. 21 


with localities here, and Gorges had become despondent and 
almost desperate. Many members of the corporation gave up 
their partnership rather than pay their shares of the expenses ; 
and it was difficult to find others to take their places. They 
tried the policy of dividing the whole territory among their 
members, in severalty, which came to nothing. Dissensions 
arose, and the Earl of Warwick withdrew from their meetings, 
but still kept the great seal, and evaded the calls that were 
made upon him to deliver it to the treasurer. They did not 
know what patents had been issued, and the President was 
“entreated to direct a course for finding out.” It was proposed 
to send over a surveyor to settle limits, and commissioners to hear 
and determine grievances. ‘The company became reduced from 
forty to twenty-one, notwithstanding recruits had been dili- 
gently sought among the merchants. Their records from 
November, 1632, to January, 1634, are wanting. When they 
begin again, the only remaining objects aimed at seem to have 
been a renewal of the policy of assigning to members distinct 
portions of the region embraced in their charter, and a surrender 
of the charter to the King, who is besought to graciously ratify 
the division, and confirm it by his own decree. This he does 
not appear ever to have formally done; and the Great Council 
for planting, ruling, and governing New England, came to an 
end in 1635, leaving no other incumbrances upon the soil than 
such as arose from a few larger patents, which depended for their 
force and validity very much upon the royal sanction they ulti- 
mately received, and some grants whose proprietors were in the 
country engaged in actual occupancy or management. 

Dr. Palfrey, in his history, gives a list of twenty-four grants 
made, or supposed to have been made, by the Council for New 
England before the final partition attempted among themselves. 
From these we must take the doubtful, or at any rate futile, 
division among the partners alleged to have been effected in 
1622; also the Charter of Nova Scotia to Sir William Alexander, 
which came directly from the King with the assent of the 
Council, how signified does not appear; also the supposed grants 
to Thompson, Weston, and Wollaston, which, if ever formally 
executed, were soon forfeited or abandoned, like some others that 
might be added from the Records; also the patent of Connecticut, 


oe a 
. 


22 HISTORY OF GRANTS UNDER THE 





March 19, 1631, which proceeded from the Earl of Warwick per- 
sonally, and was apparently founded on an actual or expected title 
passed, or to be passed, from the Council to himself. It is possi-- 
ble that, like the deed of Cape Ann to the Pilgrims, by Lord 
Sheffield in 1623, it was based on a contemplated division 
among the Council that was never perfected Grants were 
sometimes spoken of as made that were not drawn up; and 
sometimes the execution, long delayed, was not formally com- 
pleted, so that the Council felt at liberty to confirm or reject 
them. To some patents there were conditions attached; such as 
rent, and the introduction of settlers within a certain time, to 
remain a certain time, which, if not complied with, might 
occasion a forfeiture. 

Four in Dr. Palfrey’s list are for the benefit of the Pilgrims at 
Plymouth; but the last and amplest absorbed or cancelled the 
others. 

The first act of this nature for the benefit of the Pilgrims, 
was dated June 1, 1621. The other grants to them of 1622, 
1627, and 1630, enlarged their property and powers at Plymouth, 
and gave them a large tract of land on the Kennebec, for trade 
with the Indians; by the special favor, it is said, of the Earl of 
Warwick, who seems to have been devoted to the interests of 
the Puritans. 

There remain to be mentioned fourteen grants professedly 
emanating from the Council : — 


1st, To Captain John Mason, March 9, 1622, of the coast and islands 
between Salem River and the Merrimack, called by him “ Mariana.” It 
is said to have been imperfectly executed; and was disregarded in sub- 
sequent conveyances. 

2d, To Gorges and Mason jointly, Aug. 10, 1622, of the country 
between the Merrimack and Kennebec Rivers, and sixty miles inland from 
their mouths, “which they intend to name the Provincr or MaIne.” 

3d, To Robert Gorges, of ten miles from Boston towards Salem, just 


1 Historians have stated, without giving any authority, that the Connecticut 
territory was granted by the Council to Warwick, in 1630, and even that it was 
confirmed to him by the King. But the Council Records show that “a rough 
draft” of a patent for the Earl of Warwick, relating to the same territory, 
was under consideration three months after his conveyance to Lord Say and 
Sele, &e. 


nae sa) Sa 


GREAT COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND. 23 


before he came over as Lieutenant-Governor. The tenure was by the 
sword, or per gladium comitatus. 

4th, To a grandson of Sir F. Gorges and his associates, of twenty- 
four thousand acres, on both sides of York River in Maine, with the 
islands within three leagues of the coast. This patent, though referred 
by Gorges to 1623, was not executed till Dec. 2, 1631, and was reissued 
the following March, with a partial change of associates. The considera- 
tion was their engaging to build a town. 

dth, To the Massachusetts Company, which, as confirmed by the royal 
charter, March 4, 1629, covered Mason’s Mariana, the tract of Robert 
Gorges, and a part of the territory of Gorges and Mason; as it was to 
embrace the country from three miles north of every part of the Merri- 
mack River to three miles south of Charles River. 

6th, To Captain John Mason, Novy. 7, 1629, from the middle of the 
Merrimack River to the middle of the Piscataqua, and sixty miles inland 
from their mouths, and all islands within five leagues of the coast; 
“ which he intends to name New HAmpsHireE.” 


A series of grants succeeded, that are well known as prolific 
of suits and legal questions to the inhabitants of Maine. These 
are — 


Ist, The joint patents of what are now the towns of Saco and 
Biddeford. 

2d, The Muscongus, or Lincoln grant, between the Muscongus and the 
Penobscot Rivers, which became the famous Waldo patent. 

3d, The Lygonia, or Plough patent, of forty miles square, between 
Cape Porpous and Cape Elizabeth, including the now City of Portland. 
The date and the grantees are both uncertain.? 

4th, The Swamscot patent, covering the towns of Dover, Durham, 
and Stratham. 

dth, The Black Point grant of fifteen hundred acres in Scarborough. 

6th, To Gorges and Mason, and certain associates, of lands on the 
Piscataqua, where some of their people had settled. 

7th, To Richard Bradshaw, fifteen hundred acres above the head of 
“ Pashippscot,” where he had been living.” 

8th, To Trelawney and Goodyear, a tract between the Black Point 
patent and the Casco River. 

9th, The well-known Pemaquid patent of twelve thousand acres, Feb. 
29, 1632, to be land “not lately granted, settled, and inhabited by any 
English.” 

1 Willis, in Hist. of Portland. 
2 This is added from the Council Records. 


24 HISTORY OF GRANTS UNDER THE ~ 




















All writers, until recently, have called the grant of Aug. 10, — 
1622, the Laconia grant. It was not till a copy of the grant of — 
August, 1622, was obtained from England, by the Maine His- 
tence Society, for publication in 1863, that the error became 
apparent. The real Laconia grant was dated Nov. 17, 1629, — 
and conveyed to Gorges and Mason “all those lands and coun- ‘i 
tries bordering upon the great lake, or lakes and rivers known — 
by the name of the River and Lake, or Rivers and Lakes of the — 
Iroquois,” meaning thereby Lake Champlain. The final and — 
effective grant of the Province of Maine was:to Gorges, directly — 
from the King, April 3, 1639, when the Council for New England ~ 
had ceased to exist. . 
The heirs of Gorges and Mason, after vain efforts to sustain — 
their title to Maine and New Hampshire, ultimately surrendered 
their claims for a moderate consideration; while the minor tracts, 
in process of time, came to be defined and adjusted by legis-— 
lative and judicial interference. ; 
It may be said, with probable truth, that, but for the success 
of Massachusetts, all other grants or patents from the Council — 
would have come to nought; and that, on one side the French, | 4 
and on the other the Daten, or else the original natives, would — 
have become possessed of all New England. It was so as-_ 
serted when Massachusetts was summoned to show cause why P 
its charter should not be revoked. 
Yet the charter of the Massachusetts Company gave the deaitil 5 
blow to the Council for New England. In connection with the — 
litigious attacks of the Virginia Gnanaes. who desired to break — 
up the monopoly of the fisheries, and the protest of the French — 
ambassador, it is assigned, by themselves, as the principal cause — 
of the surrender of their charter. They complained that their own © 
grant to this company had been unfairly obtained and unreason- — 
ably enlarged, absorbing the tract of Robert Gorges, and riding 
over the heads of all those lords who had portions assigned them — 
in the King’s presence; that its members wholly excluded them-_ 
selves from the government of the Council, and made themselves — 
a free people, “ whereby they did rend in pieces the first foun- 
dation of the building.” On account of these troubles, and upon | 
these considerations, they resolved to surrender their own patent — 
to the King. 


GREAT COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND. 25 

The political purpose of the founders of Massachusetts, and 
its friends in England, when clearly understood, will be seen to 
shed a new light upon many obscure points of our own and also 
of English history. 

It is curious to observe, among the men who intended to come 
to New England, Pym, Hampden, Sir Arthur Hazierig, and 
Oliver Cromwell. It is instructive to notice, that it was the 
Earl of Warwick who managed to obtain the patent for the 
Massachusetts Company, as Gorges relates; that it was the 
same earl who, on his own responsibility, conveyed Connecticut 
to Lord Say and Sele, Lord Rich, Charles Fiennes, John Pym, 
John Hampden, Herbert Pelham, and others; and then to re- 
mark that, in the revolution which soon took place in England, 
the Earl of Warwick, Lord Say and Sele, and Lord Mandeville, 


_ the son-in-law of Warwick, are designated by Clarendon as chief 


managers among the Peers; while in the House of Commons, 
Pym, Hampden, Sir Harry Vane, and Nathaniel Fiennes, brother 
of Charles, were principal leaders. From these, and many other 
coincidences, it looks as if the revolution at home was only a 
carrying out and extending of the political experiment which it 
had first been their intention to try in New England. And the 
impression is strengthened, when we learn that members of the 
original Massachusetts Company took a prominent part in all 
the public movements of the revolutionary party, — in Parlia- 
ment, in the Army, in the Assembly of Divines at Westminster, 
and among the Judges appointed for the trial of the King. It is 
not strange that the lesser purpose, and the more limited inten- 
tion, should have been forgotten or obscured, amid the exciting _ 
events of the grander and more comprehensive undertaking. 

A more particular account of the grants made or proposed by 
the Council, which would have been tedious in a lecture before 


a general audience, is given in a supplement. 


1 Dr. Palfrey (Hist. of N. E., vol. i. p. 808) refers to the probable purpose of a 
renovated England in America entertained by the Puritan leaders, in view of the 


- clouds that were gathering over the political prospects at home ; and quotes a remark 


Chg, 


of Burke, to whom the same reflection had occurred. See also Hist. of N. E., 
vol. i. p. 390, n. 




































26 HISTORY OF THE GRANTS UNDER THE 


SUPPLEMENT. 


Every one at all familiar with the grants from the Council for New Eng- 
land must be aware that their history would properly fill the pages of a large 
volume. All that a single lecture can accomplish, even with the aid of : 
supplement, is to take the place of an introductory chapter, giving some accoun 7 
of the subject-matter, and an abstract of the most important facts and con- 
clusions. It is believed that the list of grants here presented is more full an ad 
more correct than any before attempted; but in a case where our most careful 
historians have been led into remarkable errors, it would be unreasonable to 
demand absolute accuracy or completeness. The patience required for the 
selection and verification of the particulars now brought together, the reader 
will hardly be able to appreciate. ¥ 


SuMMARY OF GRANTS FROM THE Canes Counci, ror New ENGLAND. 


No. 1.— The first grant from the Council, of which there is any recuee 
was taken out in the name of John Peirce, citizen and clothworker of London, 
and his associates, June 1, 1621, for the benefit of the Pilgrims at Plymouwi 
It allowed one hundred acres to each planter within seven years, free liberty 
to fish on the coast of New England, and fifteen hundred aeres for public uses. 
After seven years, a rent of two shillings for every one hundred acres to be paid 
annually. The lands having been properly surveyed and set out by metes and 
bounds at the charge of the grantees, upon reasonable request within sey! 
years they are to be confirmed by deed, and letters of incorporation granted, 
with liberty to make laws and constitutions of government. In the mean time, 
the undertakers and planters are authorized to establish such laws and ordi-_ 
nances, and appoint such officers, as they shall by most voices agree upo 
This patent was first printed from the original manuscript, with an introduction 
and notes, by Charles Deane, Esq., in 1854.. The land was to be taken am y- 
where not within ten miles of land already inhabited, or located by authority 
of the Council, unless it be on the opposite side of some river. 

No. 2. —1622, March 9. Captain John Mason’s ‘‘ Mariana.” The nes d- 
land “known by the name of Tragabigsenda, or Cape Anne, with the north, 
south, and east shores thereof,” from Naumkeag River, to a river north-west- 
ward from the Cape (the Merrimack), then up that river to its head, thence 
across to the head of the other river; with all the islands within three miles of 
the shore. Hubbard, Hist. of N. E., pp. 614-16. , 

No. 3. — 1622, April 20. To John Peirce. This was an attempt of Peirce 
to surrender the indenture of June 1, 1621, and take a deed of the lands 
himself, his heirs, associates, and assigns. When it was ascertained that his 
associates were not privy to this movement, he was compelled to agree 1 0 





Sasi! ea ee Oe 
> ei : 


ri 


GREAT COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND. ur) 


submit the matter to the authority and pleasure of the Council. See Council 
Records, in Proceedings of American Antiquarian Society of April, 1867. 

No. 4.— 1622, May 31. In the Records of the Council of this date, it is 
stated, that ‘‘ order is given for patents to be drawn for the Earl of Warwick, 
and his associates, the Lord Gorges, Sir Robert Mansell, Sir Ferdinando 
Gorges.” Dr. Palfrey regards this order as referring to a division of the 
country, from the Bay of Fundy to Narraganset Bay, among twenty as- 
sociates, in which the region about Cape Ann fell to Lord Sheffield, who sold 
a patent for it to the New-Plymouth people. Captain John Smith, in his 
“« Generall Historie,” published in 1624, says that New England was ‘‘ engrossed 
by twenty patentees who divided my map into twenty parts, and cast lots for 
their shares.” Mr. Thornton, in his interesting work on Cape Ann, has a 
map from Purchas representing this division, and a fac-simile of the patent 
from Lord Sheffield above mentioned. ‘here may have been such a division 
suggested when Captain Smith wrote, and Purchas, writing at the same date, may 
have prepared the map to correspond with that expectation. ‘The above order 
from the Records of the Council seems, however, to be limited in its applica- 
tion to the Earl of Warwick, and three associates; and there is no account of 
such a division as the map exhibits in the Records, as we have them, or in the 
“Relation of the President and Council,” or in the ‘‘ Briefe Narration” of 
Gorges, or in the act of the Resignation of the Charter, where it would 
naturally appear. The division referred to by Gorges in his ‘‘ Briefe Narration,” 
and which is described in the proceedings for the surrender of the charter, is a 
very different one, and quite inconsistent with that exhibited by the map. It is 
not improbable that the distribution mentioned by Smith, may be alluded 
to in the agreement for the division, Feb. 3, 1634-5, thus: ‘‘ Forasmuch 
as... in the 8th (? 18th) year of the reign of King James, of blessed 
memory, in whose presence lots were drawn for settling of divers and sundry 
divisions of land, on the sea-coast of the said country, upon most of us, which 
hitherto have never been confirmed in the said lands so allotted, and to the intent 
that every one of us according to equity, and in some reasonable manner 
answerable to his adventures or other interest, may enjoy a proportion of the 
said country to be immediately holden of his Majesty, we therefore,” &c. 
The deed from Lord Sheffield, dated Jan. 1, 1623—4, isin direct conflict with the 
grant from the Council to Mason, May 9, 1622. (See above, No. 2.) Lord 
Sheffield’s conveyance of Cape Ann, like that of Connecticut by the Earl of 
Warwick, was probably based upon a proposed division that was never 
legally completed. See note at the end of this Supplement. 

No. 5.—1622, Aug. 10: By indenture to Sir Ferdinando Gorges and 
Captain John Mason, ‘‘ All that part of the mainland in New England lying 
upon the sea-coast, betwixt the rivers of Merrimack and Sagadahoc, and to the 
furthest heads of the said rivers, and so forwards up into the land westward, 
until threescore miles be finished from the first entrance of the aforesaid rivers, 
and half way over; that is to say, to the midst of the said two rivers,” ‘‘ to- 


gether with all the islands and islets within five leagues’ distance of the 


premises,” which, it is stated, the grantees with the consent of the President 
and Council intend to name ‘‘ The Province of Maine.” 


28 HISTORY OF THE GRANTS UNDER THE 





























The error of Dr. Belknap in supposing this-to be the Laconia grant, has — 
been repeated by historians to the present time. Mr. Deane, who saw the ~ 
true Laconia deed in the Record Office in London, two years ago, gives the 
correct statement in the Report of the Council of the American Antiquarian — 
Society, Oct. 21, 1868. The grant of Aug. 10, 1622, is given in full in the 
Provincial Papers of New Hampshire, edited by Dr. Bouton (Concord, 1867), 
who also makes the correction. Hutchinson, Hist., vol.i. p. 282, ed. of 1795, says nl 
this grant ‘‘ did not appear to have been signed, sealed, or witnessed by any j 
order of the Council.” See Provincial Papers of New Hampshire, p. 28, note. 
For an interesting opinion of Sir William Jones, the King’s Attorney-General, in 
1679, on the validity of the several grants to Mason, on the absence of any 
right in the Council for New England to confer powers of government, and on 
the requirement of their charter that their grants should appear to be the acts — 
of a majority of the Council present at a lawful meeting, see Hubbard’s 
Hist. of N. E., pp. 616-621. 

No. 6.— 1622, Nov. 16. The Council Records speak of Mr. Thompson’s — 
patent as ‘‘ this day signed.” In the Appendix to the memorial volume of the 
Maine Historical Society, is a copy of an ancient, but imperfect list of New- 
England patents, from the Record Office, London, in which the first named is 
“a patent to David Thompson, M. Jobe, M. Sherwood, of Plimouth, for a pt. 
of Piscattowa River.” Whatever Thompson’s grant may have been, it came 
to nothing. He was a Scotchman, apparently in the service of the Gorges’ 
family, and lived at one time on the Piscataqua River; and at another, on 
“« Thompson's Island,” in Boston Harbor. € 

No. 7. — 1622. Thomas Weston was supposed to have a patent of land at 
Wessagusset (Weymouth, Mass.). Bradford, p. 122. ‘* Weston’s patent is not 
extant, and little is known respecting it.” Deane, in Bradford, p. 124, nofe. ; 

No. 8. — 1622, Dec. 30. To Robert Gorges, son of Sir Ferdinando, ‘‘ A 
that part of the mainland commonly called Messachusiac, on the north-east 
side of the Bay known by the name of Massachuset, together with all the shores 
along the sea for ten English miles in a strait line towards the north-east, an 


‘*the sword,” per Gladium Comitatus. When Robert Gorges came over, he 
located himself at Wessagusset, which was not within his grant. Among the: 
manuscript records of Massachusetts is a memorandum to the effect, that, Robert 
Gorges having died without issue, the land descended to his eldest brother, Jo hn, 
who conveyed it to Sir William Brereton, Jan. 10, 1628. Brereton died 
leaving a son anda daughter. The son died, and the daughter married Edmund 
Lenthall ; and their only daughter and heir married Mr. Levett, of the Inner 
Temple, who claimed the land in right of his wife. See note to the ‘* Briefe 
Narration ” of Gorges, in Coll. of Me. Hist. Soc., vol. ii. p. 46. ‘ 

No. 9. — 1623. To Ferdinando Gorges, grandson of Sir Ferdinando, and 
his associates, among whom were ‘‘ Walter Norton, Lieutenant-Colonel 
Thomas Coppyn, Esq., Samuel Maverick, Esq., Thomas Graves, Gent. (an 
engineer), Raphe Glover, merchant, William Jeffryes, Gent., John Busley, 


GREAT COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND. 29 


Gent., Joel Woolsey, Gent., all of New England.” -The date of 1623 is 
derived from the ‘‘ Briefe Narration,” chap. xxv., where Gorges says his grand- 
son, and some of his associates, hastened to take possession at the time, carry- 
ing with them their families; but according to the Council Records, the date 
of sealing the patent was Dec. 2, 1631. It was renewed March 2, 1632, with 
some change in the associates, and the former patent cancelled. The grant was 
first, of one hundred acres to each person transported within seven years, if he 
remained three years; second, of twelve thousand more, to the associates, on 
the east side of the river Agamenticus, on the coast three miles, and into the 
Jand so far as to contain twelve thousand acres, and one hundred acres more for 
each person ; third, to F. Gorges himself, besides the above,twelve thousand acres 
on the opposite or western side of the river along the coast westerly to the land 
appropriated to the plantation at Pascataquack (Portsmouth), and so along the 
river Agamenticus, and the bounds of Pascataquack, into the mainland so far as 
to contain twelve thousand acres; with all the islands within three leagues into 
the ocean. In consideration that they have undertaken to build a town. ‘Two 
shillings to be paid yearly for every one hundred acres of arable land after seven 
years. ‘This description is from the Records of the Council, in Proceedings of 
the American Society of April, 1867. See also respecting this grant, Coll. of 
Me. Hist. Soc., vol. 11. pp. 49, 50, note. At a meeting of the Council, March 22, 
1637 (after the surrender of their charter), it is stated that this grant was 
renewed to Edward Godfrey and others, and ‘‘ this day the seal of the com- 


" pany was set thereunto.” 


No. 10.—1628. To the Plymouth people, of lands on the Kennebec. 
Renewed and enlarged the next year. Bradford, p. 232. 

No. 11.—The Massachusetts patent of March 19, 1628, made into a Royal 
charter, March 4, 1629. Dr. Palfrey expresses an opinion, that the patentees 
among whom the coast of New England had been partitioned six years before 
surrendered their claims, founded on the following record of the Massa- 
chusetts Company: ‘‘ Sept. 29, 1629. —It is thought fit, and ordered, that the 
secretary shall write out a copy of the former grant to the Earl of Warwick and 
others, which was by them resigned to this gompany, to be presented to his 
lordship.” 

The patent of the Massachusetts Company from the New-England Council 
is not extant; and there is some mystery attending the manner of its procure- 
ment, as well as about its original extent. Sir F. Gorges says, that, on the 
request of the Earl of Warwick, he consented to a grant that should not be 
prejudicial to the interests of his son Robert. In the act of resignation of their 
charter by the Council, they say, that the Massachusetts Company, ‘‘ present- 
ing the names of honest and religious men, easily obtained their first desires ; 
but those being once gotten, they used other means to advance themselves a 
step beyond their first proportions to a second grant, surreptitiously gotten, 
of other lands also, justly passed unto Captain Robert Gorges long before.” 
Robert Mason, petitioning the King, in 1676, for possession of the lands granted 
to his grandfather, declares that the Massachusetts Company ‘‘ did surrep- 
titiously, and wnknown to the said Council, get the seal of the said Council 
affixed to a grant of certain lands;” and did, by their subtile practices, get a 


30 HISTORY OF THE GRANTS UNDER THE 


confirmation under the great seal of England. In their answer to this petition, 
the Massachusetts authorities deny the charge, no doubt with sincerity ; but all 
circumstances leave an impression on the mind that, by the influence, perhaps. 
by the management, of the Earl of Warwick, advantages were gained, which — 
many, if not most, of the Council would have objected to. By the favor of 
Warwick, the Plymouth people obtained their lands on the Kennebec; and the : 
patent of Connecticut was made in his own name, by what authority does not 
sufficiently appear. These facts may explain the dissatisfaction which arose be- 
tween the Council and Warwick, their president, and the efforts of the Council 
to get the seal out of his possession. He seems not to have eared for personal 
proprietorship, but to have desired to give his Puritan friends the advantage 
of his official position and influence. 

No. 12.—1629, Nov. 7. By indenture, to Captain John Mason, part of the 
same territory which was conveyed bya similar deed to Gorges and Mason, jointly, 
Aug. 10, 1622. The difference being, that instead of extending from the middle 
of the Merrimack River to the middle of the Sagadahoc, on the coast, and back 
into the interior sixty miles between those limits, this grant extends no farther 
than the middle of the Piscataqua River, but the same distance into the interior 
between the Merrimack and the Piscataqua, including also islands within five 
leagues of the shore; ‘‘ which the said Captain John Mason, with the consent 
of the President and Council, intends to name New Hampshire.” In the deed 
to Gorges and Mason, it was proposed to call the whole territory the Province 
of Maine. The form and general phraseology of the two deeds are alike. 
If the first instrument was valid, this one, of necessity, could be of no effect. 
See above, No. 5; Provincial Papers of New Hampshire, pp. 21 and 28, note; 
Hazard, vol. i. p. 289. oe 

No. 18.—1629, Nov.17. Thisis the true Laconia grant, which, by a mistake, 
originating doubtless in a misprint, has sometimes had the date Nov. 27, 
instead of Nov. 17, assigned to it. There is a copy of it in the office of 
the Secretary of State of Massachusetts. It embraces, in substance, the lands 
bordering upon the great lake (Champlain), or lakes and rivers commonly — 
known by the name of the river and lake, or rivers and lakes, of the Iroquois; 


together with those lakes and rivers, and the land within ten miles of any part 


of them on the south or east, and from the west end or sides so far to the west 
as shall extend half-way into the next great lake to the westward; thence 
northward into the north side of the main river running from the great western 
lakes into the river of Canada, including all islands within the precincts. 

The nullity of this grant is shown by the fact, that so many careful historians 
have confounded it with that of Aug, 10, 1622, another imperfect and ineffectual 
instrument. See N. H. Provincial Papers, vol. i. pp. 28 and 38. Hubbard, 
Hist. of N. E., chap. xxxi., says, that after three years of fruitless endeavors 
for the more full discovery of ‘‘an imaginary Province called Laconia,” the 
agents of Gorges returned to England with a ‘‘non est inventa Provincia.” 

No. 14. — 1629, 0.s., Jan.13. The last Plymouth patent, to William Brad- 
ford and his associates, in consideration that they have lived nine years in New 
England, and planted a town at their own cost, and are able to relieve new 
planters: All that part of New England between the middle of Cohasset River 





oS TD 


GREAT COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND. 31 


and the middle of Narraganset River, and up from the mouths of those rivers 
in a strait line into the mainland as far as the utmost limits of the country 
called ‘‘ Pokenacutt, alias Sowamsett;”’ and bounded on the east by the ocean, 
without including islands on the coast. And as the grantees have no con- 
venient place for trading or fishing within their own precincts, there is also 
conveyed to them all that tract of land, between, or extending from, the utmost 
limits of Cobbisconte, which adjoins the river Kennebec, towards the western 
ocean, and a place called the Falls at Nequamkike; and the space of fifteen 
miles on each side of the river Kennebec, and all the said river Kennebec 
that lies within the said limits and bounds, eastward, westward, northward, 
or southward, last above mentioned. ‘The patent gave a right of passage to 
and from the ocean, and the right of fishing on the neighboring shores, not 
inhabited or otherwise disposed of, and also privileges of administration. It 
appears to have no other signature than that of the Earl of Warwick. 

The Plymouth people tried in vain to procure a charter from the Crown, with 
powers of government. They strengthened their rights in Maine by deeds from 
the Indians, and endeavored to establish settlements ; but tired of the vexation 
which that property gave them, they sold their entire interest, in 1661, to four 
persons, for four hundred pounds. In 1753, the then owners became a cor- 
poration, by the name of ‘‘ the Proprietors of the Kennebec Purchase;” and, 
after much controversy and litigation, the obscure boundaries were ultimately 
adjusted. See Gardiner’s ‘‘ Hist. of the Kennebec Purchase,” in Coll. of Maine 
Hist. Society, vol. ii. The patent is in Hazard, vol. 1. pp. 298-303. 

No. 15.— 1630, Feb. 12. At this date, two deeds were issued of the land 
between Cape Elizabeth and Cape Porpoise in Maine, each of four miles along the 
coast, and eight miles into the mainland; one on the north side of the Saco River 
to Thomas Lewis and Richard Bonython, the other on the south side of the Saco 
River to John Oldham and Richard Vines. From these grants have sprung the 
two towns of Saco and Biddeford, retaining nearly the same limits. Hist. of 
Saco and Biddeford, by George Folsom. 

No. 16. — 1630, March 13. The Muscongus grant, afterwards known as the 
Waldo patent. The abstract of this grant, in Hazard, Coll. vol. 1. pp. 304, 305, 
taken from the Maine Records, is unintelligible. Williamson, Hist. of Me. 
vol. i. p. 240, describes it as extending from the seaboard, between the rivers 
Penobscot and Muscongus, to an unsurveyed line running east and west so far 
north as would, without imterfering with any other patent, embrace a territory 
equal to thirty miles square; and adds, in a note, that the north line, as since 
settled, is in the south line of Hampden, Newbury, and Dixmont. The grant 
was to John Beauchamp and Thomas Leverett, of England. Leverett is said 
to have succeeded to the property on the death of Beauchamp. John Leverett, 
President of Harvard College, as sole heir of his grandfather, became the owner 
in 1715. By the admission of partners, a company was formed, consisting of 
thirty proprietors, who first employed Brigadier-General Samuel Waldo as 
agent, and ultimately assigned to him the largest interest in the patent. Coll. 
of Me. Hist. Society, vol. vi. art. xv. 

No. 17. —1630. The Lygonia, or Plough patent, considered to extend from 
Kennebunk River to Harpswell in Casco Bay, or, as usually stated, from Cape 































32 HISTORY OF THE GRANTS UNDER THE 


Porpoise to Cape Elizabeth, and forty miles inland. Hubbard, Ind. Wars, 7 
part ii. p. 9, says the patent was granted in the year 1630, and signed by the 
Earl of Warwick and Sir Ferdinando Gorges. Willis, Hist. of Portland, p. 29, 
says he has never ‘‘ been able to discover this patent, nor ascertain its date, . 
nor who are the patentees.”” Different names are given in different accounts, 
An unsuccessful attempt at settlement was made in 1631. In 1643 the patent 
was transferred to Alexander Rigby, a rich English lawyer, who appointed — 
George Cleaves as his deputy. The contest of conflicting jurisdictions between _ 
the representative of Rigby and the representatives of Gorges was only ended > 
when Massachusetts took possession of the whole territory in 1672. Sullivan, ‘ 
Hist. of Me., pp. 309-319; ib., ‘Land Titles,” p. 44; Williamson, Hist. of Me. 
vol. i. p. 288; Folsom, Hist. of Saco and Biddeford, pp. 26-28. a 
No. 18. — 1631, March 12. To Edward Hilton, ‘all that part of the river — 
Piscataqua called Hilton’s Point, with the S. side of the said river up to the falls — 
of Squamscot (or Swamscot), and three miles into the mainland for breadth. ” 
Following Dr. Belknap and Dr. Palfrey, I stated in the lecture that this grant 
covered the towns of Dover, Durham, and Stratham. But in the recently pub- > 
lished Provincial Papers of New Hampshire, p. 29, Dr. Bouton, the editor, — 
says, ‘‘No document relating to New Hampshire has been so grossly misrep- 
resented as this. . . . It covered only Hilews Point; . . . and the whole did not — 
exceed a township five miles square.” Its extent and its ownership, in 1656, — 
as shown in a record of partition, by authority of Massachusetts, may be seen 
in ibid., pp. 221-223. i 
No. 19. — 1631, Nov. 4, by the Council Records (Willis, and others, say 
Novy. 1). To Thomas Cammock, fifteen hundred acres, lying upon the 
mainland along the sea-coast, on the east side of Black Point River. This is _ 
now a part of Scarborough, and included Stratton’s islands. Possession given : 
in 1633; patent confirmed by Gorges in 1640. The tract is now held under — 
this title. Willis, Hist. of Portland, p. 31. - : . 
No. 20. —1631, Nov. 4. To Richard Bradshaw, ‘‘ fifteen hundred acres, — 
to be allotted above the head of Pashippscot (Pejepscot), on the north side — 
thereof, not formerly granted to any other.” Council Records. This, and the — 
grant to Cammock, were in consideration that the grantees had been living on { 
the premises for some years. a 
The Council Records of Dec. 2, 1631, say, that Lord Gorges and Sir Fenda 
nando Gorges gave order for two patents, one for Walter Bagnall for a small — 4 
island, called Richmond Island, and fifteen hundred acres on the mainland, to } 
be selected by Walter Neale and Richard Vines ; another for John Stratton, of 
two thousand acres, on the south side of Cape Porpoise, and ‘‘on the other — 
side northwards into the south side of the harbor’s mouth of Cape Porpoise.” — 
Sainsbury’s Calendar, p. 137, has it ‘‘ John Stratton of Shotley, co. Suffolk, i 
and his associates.” r. 
Bagnall was at Richmond Island in 1628, where he was killed by the Indiana 
Oct. 8, 1631 (previous to the date above stated). Willis, Hist. of Portland. p. 25. — 
No. 21.— 1631, Nov. 4. To Sir Ferdinando Gorges and Captain John — 
Mason, and their associates, a portion of land on the Piscataqua River, ‘‘ along — 
the seashore westward five miles, and by an imaginary line into the mainland, 


oie diet Sa Wied 





GREAT COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND. 33 


north to the bounds of a plantation belonging to Edward Hilton ; and the islands 
within the same river eastward, together with three miles along the shore to the 
eastward of said river, and opposite to the habitation and plantation where 
Captain Neale lives, and up into the mainland northerly, by all the breadth 
aforesaid, thirty miles; with the lakes at the head of said river.” In considera- 
tion of service formerly done, and the settlement there by Captain Neale, the 
erection of salt-pans, &e. 

They were to pay to the Council forty shillings sterling, payable at the 
Assurance House, Royal Exchange, London, if demanded. First payment at 
the Feast of St. Michael, 1632, ‘‘and so for all service from year to year.” 
Abstract in the Council Records. Hubbard, Hist. of N. E., chap. xxxi., says, 
that in his time, a copy of this indenture was extant at Portsmouth. He makes 
the date Nov. 3, 1631, and the instrument to be without signature or seal; but 
he says, ‘‘it seems to be of as much force as other instruments of like nature 
produced on such’ like accounts at the present time.” The Council Records 
state that the patent was sealed Nov. 4. Hubbard calls the sum to be paid 
forty-eight pounds per annum, instead of the forty shillings mentioned in the 
Records. The names of the associates are in Hubbard. 

No. 22.— 1631, Dec. 1. To Robert Trelawny and Moses Goodyear, the 
tract lyme between Cammock’s patent ‘‘ and the bay and river of Casco, and 
extending northwards into the mainland, so far as the limits and bounds of the 
lands granted to the said Thomas Cammock, do and ought to extend towards 
the north.” It was claimed that this grant included Cape Elizabeth, and nearly 
all the ancient town of Falmouth, and part of Gorham and Richmond island. 
A contest was maintained, in reference to boundaries, for many years, extending 
beyond the lives of the first settlers. Willis, Hist. of Portland, pp. 32, 33; 
Council Records. 

No. 23.— 1632, Feb. 29. To Robert Aldworth and Giles Elbridge: first. 
one hundred acres for every person transported by them within seven years, 
adjacent to twelve thousand acres, afterwards mentioned, and not lately granted, 
or settled and inhabited, by any English. Second, twelve thousand acres more 
to be laid out near the river Pemaquid, along the sea-coast as the coast lieth, 
and up the river as far as may contain the said twelve thousand acres and 
the hundred acres for each person transported, together with all the islands 
opposite their coast within three leagues into the ocean. In consideration that 
they have undertaken to build a town, &c. Powers of government, or ad- 
ministration, are also expressed in the deed, which was signed by the Earl of 
Warwick and Sir Ferdinando Gorges. Pemaquid, like other territories in 
Maine, has been a subject of much controversy, and has experienced many 
vicissitudes. It is said that one of its sons is preparing a history of its fortunes. 
“Ancient Pemaquid” has already been the subject of an Historical Review, by 
Mr. Thornton. A notarial copy on parchment of the original deed, and two 
volumes of the records of its proprietors, from 1743 to 1774, are in the library 


_ of the American Antiquarian Society. 


No. 24. — 1632, June 16. Under this date, in Mr. Sainsbury’s Calendar 
of Colonial Papers in the State Paper Office, London, is the following entry: 
“Grant of the Council for New England to George Way and Thomas Purchas, 






























34 HISTORY OF THE GRANTS UNDER THE 


of certain lands in New England, called the River Bishopscotte, and al 
bounds and limits the mainland adjoining the river to the extent of two 
By Bishopscotte is meant Pejepscot, now ew Brunswick. Purchas, it is 
took possession in 1628, and lived there many years. In 1639, he conve 
the title and jurisdiction to Massachusetts, reserving the interest and possessi 
of such lands as he should use and improve within seven years. Hazard, vol 
p- 407. The country was depopulated during the Indian war of 1675; 
which, Richard Wharton obtained the claims of both Purchas and Way, 
pecting a confirmation from the King, but died before his plans were comp 
See Willis, Hist. of Portland, p. 24; Coll. of Me. Hist. Society, vol. iii. arti 
v. and vi. 

The original deed to Way and Purchas has long since been lost, onal 
record of it remains. This grant was the subject of a long and bitter cont 
versy between the Pejepscot proprietors and other claimants, not finally se 
till about 1814. Willis, Hist. of Portland, p. 64, note. 


The efforts of the Council to divide New England into provinces, or | 
ships, and distribute these among themselves, remain to be noticed. — 
are indications that such a design was entertained at an early period; but 
charter was found to be defective, and arrangements were soon made for a 
one, from which all the patentees who had not paid their dues were to be 
cluded. To entitle a partner to the benefit of the lands and the privilege 
a patentee, a payment of £110 was required. It was voted that delinque 
should forfeit all interest under the charter, and their rights and privileges 
transferred to persons willing to take their places and make the paymer 
Not more than half of the original patentees accepted the conditions of 
bership, and fewer still seem to have redeemed their pledges. 

At various dates in the Records, — May 31, 1622, July 24, 1622, June 

j32, —ag introduced having in view 
assignment of territory, more or less particularly designated, to certain n 
bers. But all these orders and agreements, whatever may have been the i 
tions of the Council at the time, were treated as of no validity when they 
to surrender the charter to the King. Im preparation for that event, they 
on the 3d of eeege eee and divided the coast of New England 
eight parts; viz. ap 
ist, From me Pinas limits in the fortieth degree of latitude to Hud 
River. 
2d, From Hudson’s River to a river or creek (‘‘ near a place called Redunes 
or Reddownes”) about sixty miles eastward. 

3d, From that river eastward about forty-five miles, to a river or creek calle d 
Fresh River. ’ 

4th, From the Connecticut River to the Narraganset River, accounted al 
sixty miles. 3 

5th, From Narraganset River around Cape Cod to Naumkeag (Salem). 

6th, From Naumkeag to Piscataqua Harbor and River.. 

7th, From Piscataqua Harbor to the Kennebec River. 

8th, From the Kennebec River to the St. Croix. 









GREAT COUNCIL FOR NEW ENGLAND. 30 


By comparing the Council Records, the ‘‘ Briefe Narration” of Gorges, and 
Hubbard’s History of New England, we fmd that the /irst portion was assigned 
to the Earl of Arundel (Gorges says Lord Mulgrave, who was originally Lord 
Sheffield) ; the Second to the Duke of Richmond (in place of the Duke of 
Lenox) , the Yhird to the Earl of Carlisle; the /ourth to Lord Gorges; the 

fifth to the Marquis of Hamilton; the Sixth to Captain John Mason; the 
Seventii to Sir Ferdinando Gorges; the Mighth to Lord Alexander. 

Each of these divisions was to extend back into the interior sixty miles, 
except the last, which reached to the ‘“‘ river of Canada.” 

Each division, except the last two, was to have, in addition, ten thousand 
acres on the ‘‘ east part of Sagadahoc.” The seventh division was to have 
with it the north half of the Isles of Shoals and the Isles of Capawock, Nauti- 
can, &¢., near Cape Cod; and the eighth division the Island called Mattawack, 
or the Long Island, west of Cape Cod. The south half of the Isles of Shoals 
was to go with the division of Captain Mason. 

There is apparently a space omitted between ‘‘ Fresh River,” wherever that 
was, and the Connecticut. 

These divisions are described with particularity in the Records of the Coun- 
cil. It is stated that the grants were signed and delivered on the fourteenth 
day of April; that, on the eighteenth, leases, for three thousand years, of the 
several divisions, were made to the persons interested ; and that on the twenty- 
-second, deeds of feofment were made to them. 

To every one that had previously a lawful grant of lands was reserved the 
freehold with its rights, he ‘‘ laying down his jura regalia (if he have any) and 
paying some small acknowledgement, for that he is now to hold his land anew 
of the proprietor of the division.” 

It is to be inferred that this remnant of the Council included all who were 
then desirous, or qualified, to receive assignments of territory. 

The account of this division by Hubbard, Hist. of N. E., chap. xxxi., differs 
from that in the Records in many important particulars, and is less likely to be 
correct. 

On the 26th of April, 1635, the Council prepared a petition to the King that 
he would cause patents to be made for the several divisions, to be held imme- 
diately from himself; and on the 5th of May resolved that the deeds should be 
acknowledged before a Master in Chancery, and enrolled before the surrender 
of the charter, and the King be requested to confirm them under the Great 
Seal; also to prosecute a suit at law for the repeal of the Massachusetts patent. 
They also prepared the form of an acceptance for the King to adopt on their 
surrender of the charter, and a declaration of the reasons on account of which 
the surrender was made. The formal resignation was dated June 7, 1635. 

The acceptance of the surrender may have been held in abeyance for a 
‘time, as meetings of the Council are recorded, Nov. 26, 1635, March 22, 1637, 
and Noy. 1, 1638, at which business was transacted. The Earl of Lindsay. de- 
sired to have a proportion of land allotted to him ; which was assented to, to be 
“on y° river where the Flemings are seated,” above the Duke of Richmond. 
Lord Maltravers wished for ‘‘a degree more in longitude and latitude joining 
his limits (had he taken the place of some one of the eight grantees ?), which the 





































36 HISTORY OF THE GRANTS FOR NEW ENGLAND. 


Council were willing to assent to, if he would declare in what direction he wanted — 
it. The Earl of Sterling’s (Lord Alexander’s) proportion was carried mor 
distinctly to the Kennebec River; and Lord Gorges, and Sir F erdinando Gorges, 
were each allowed sixty miles fone up into the mainland. : By 
Our supplement can afford no space for comments or inferences; but it is 
apparent that no such division as is referred to by Captain John Smith in 1624, 
and laid down on the map published by Purchas, was recognized by the Council 
as valid, and that no territorial rights were admitted as having belonged to the 
Earl of Warwick. The charter of Massachusetts was to be annulled, the enti 
coast of New England divided among the eight Proprietary’s above named, an 
all remaining rights and powers belonging to the Grand Patent surrendered te 
the King, Sir Ferdinando Gorges to be made his Lieutenant or Governor over 
the whole country as a province of the Crown. Political events at home pre 
vented the accomplishment of this design. Captain John Mason and Sir Ferdi-_ 
nando Gorges alone contrived to secure permanent advantages to themselves. 
No other executed deed of any of the proposed divisions has come down to us bu’ 
that to Mason, April 22, 1635, without, however, a confirmation from the King. | 
Gorges received his division, with the additional sixty miles into the interior, i 
the form of a charter from the Crown, dated April 3, 1639. Obscurity of descrip- 4 
tion, the overlapping of boundaries in different deeds, the introduction of powers — 
which the Council could not legally confer (such as those of government a1 
administration), and imperfect execution, seem to have rendered most of their 
early grants unsound in their own estimation; and perhaps all of them woulda 
have proved to be void or voidable if erivecied to a strict legal test. It w 
simplify the subject, if we strike from the list of those which rece | 
the final division the first eight and the thirteenth as of no subsequent con-— 
sequence, and rest the Oninct of Mason and Gorges upon the deeds to Mason — 
of Noy. 7, 1629 and April 22, 1635, and the charter to Gorges of April 3, 1639, — 
as some of their representatives appear to have done (see Prov. Papers of N.H 
p- 28, note). Massachusetts ultimately took the place of these great proprietors, 
and extended her jurisdiction over most of the territory covering the minor 
patents, whose adjustment among the parties interested was the work of much 
time, and a great deal of law. % 


, 





NOTE. 


agreement for a division among themselves, by the Council, as relates to the portion assigned to Captain 
John Mason. It is signed by the other seyen Council members. It contains also the paragraphs : 
which, in the Records of the Council, precede and follow the list and descriptions of the several divisions; _ 
and an error in copying the first paragraph has increased the confusion heretofore attending this subject. 
The agreement, as the Records show, was dated Feb. 8, 1634; and the copyist of Hubbard’s documen 
introduced that date into the first paragraph, which alludes to an attempt in the lifetime@f King James, 
and in his presence, to effect a similar division, making it appear as if the attempt occurred on that 
date. In the second edition of Hubbard, the editor, Mr. Harris, observing that there must be a mis' 
altered the figures from 1634 to 1624; a worse error, as it has led to the belief that a division was ac uw 
ally made on the 3d of February, 1624. The Records mention no such date. ‘ 
It is proper to state, that the original Records of the Council for New England are not extant. The : 
copy printed by the American Antiquarian Society, in 1867, was obtained by me in London, at the State — 
Paper Office, where the parts so recovered exist in the form of a transcript, apparently made for mt 
cial purpose. Our historians were already familiar with them there. 7 








